Tuesday, December 18, 2012

Guest Post by Tater

Greetings all! Decided to take a break from fishing (getting to cold to fish down here in Fla!! Only 71F today) and drop a note. Specifically, wanted to reply to Nate’s left-wing blather from yesterday, where he espouses gun control as the answer to the Connecticut shootings. Later in the comment section Nate poses the following: “Let me pose the question. What should be done to make sure this doesn't happen again?”

The answer of course is simple; arm the teachers.

Had one of the six teachers that died that day possessed a hand gun, the outcome of Friday’s rampage would have likely been different. Had all six of the deceased teachers had a pistol in their possession, the outcome would have been UNQUESTIONABLY different. Instead the teachers were armed only with a strict gun control ban on campus. Unfortunately bad guys never seem to obey said gun control bans, and good guys (teachers and students) generally die from them. You’d think we’d eventually figure this out given the frequencies of school shootings (a quick Google search noted 56 school shootings in the USA during my life time alone! I’m 53 btw), but the answer is always the same; scream “more gun control”, promise to magically disarm the next assailant, and then await the next massacre that will surely come. Something about Einstein’s definition of insanity comes to mind here… How ‘bout we try something different, like hang a hand gun on the belt of every teacher?? Sure, give ‘em some training, make it voluntary etc. just like we did the airline pilots after 9/11 (a program that our dear leader has abolished btw).

I’m certain the left among us will scream “NOOOOOO we have too many guns in schools now!!!” But the truth is, we don’t have enough guns in schools. Ever wonder why bad guys attack schools? Two reasons: 1) They’re guaranteed the notoriety they crave, and 2) Its easy pickings, they’ll be the only one there packing. I doubt there’s a reader of this blog who can’t rattle off a half dozen school shootings from memory, however how many of you can ever recall a crazed gunman shooting up a police station? Ever wonder why?

I’ll close my rant with an acknowledgement that gun control does work. The three great liberal leaders of the 20th century (Hitler, Stalin and Mao Zedong) all enforced extremely strict gun bans on their civilian populations that were very effective. It allowed Hitler to successfully murder 21 million people, Stalin 43 million, and the most evil of all, Chairman Mao at 65 million. All told that’s 129 million folks who died wishing they had the second amendment.

You play the liberal word parsing game well. You talk about "gun violence", not just violence.

The UK has become a much more violent and crime-ridden place since they banned handguns. Now they placing restrictions on knives. Hong Kong had a rash of meat cleaver murders and China had a bunch of school kids stabbed last week.

If this guy used his Mom's car to run over kids in the schoolyard, would you be calling for a ban on automobiles?

Exactly, 50% of the guns on Earth are owned by United States citizens is one statistic I've heard. They are out there. And they aren't going anywhere.

But I love the denial these libs live in. We have armed security at most Banks and I'm sure Jim and Nate don't bat an eye when a guy with a gun protects their money. But ooooh noooes we can't have armed security protect our kids! Tis a bridge to far!

I guess liberals just love their money in the bank more than their children...

I've tried more than a few times lately to describe this as my exact opinion and most of the people I've explained it to don't understand. We had a "mass" shooting in a mall here last week as well, that's when I started ranting. Fortunately the guy didn't know how to shoot - he only killed 2 people. But if even half of the estimated 10,000 people who were in the mall at the time had been carrying (and trained) it might have ended better for the victims.

I guess I'll go along with gun control when Barack Obama disbands all of his security detail. I mean, if we have gun control the birds will sing, there will be no more gun crime, the sun will shine down and the unicorns will play right? So if I won't need a gun to protect myself anymore why would Barack Obama? Its easy to tell people they don't need protection behind a wall of guys with MP5 sub machine guns sworn to take a bullet for you.

Anyways, I have several patients here who are among the FBI, local law enforcement, and Game Wardens (who actually have more jurisdiction than any other law enforcement agency in Texas). They are telling ranchers or anyone who owns property along the border that although they may feel they are well armed by carrying a .40 cal or .45 cal pistols, they really need to be carrying something with more firepower and more bullets. The problem is that the drug cartels crossing the border are carrying much more dangerous weapons. And, they're going to outnumber you. If you want a fighting chance, carry an AR 15 with extra ammunition IN ADDITION to your pistol. They are shooting with fully automatic weapons when they feel cornered or they stumble upon people who own property down here. It's not a fair fight down on the Texas border and people who don't live here or those who have never been in any kind of combat are telling us what we need or don't need in order to protect ourselves. That is ridiculous. The point of the second amendment has NOTHING to do with hunting. It has to do with defense.

Amen Jethro. I love it when people too pansy ass to ever get near a combat zone start telling me, a guy with over 700 combat days and 3 years working in law enforcement and who is now a professional, certified fire arms instructor - what I need to protect myself. As I said, when Barack Obama gives up his security, and the Limo Libs give up their body guards I'll give up my security.

Actually, I could say that a lot of people on Main street in my town are armed. But, I live in Texas. How many of you know that there was a movie theater shooting here in Texas the same weekend of the Newton shooting? Probably none of you did. Why? Because an armed Texan shot the shooter before he could do any more damage.

"A skilled hunter, being necessary to putting food on the table, the right of the people to hunt using non-scary, non-icky looking rifles that don’t make lefty men wet their panties shall not be infringed, mostly."

Seems the left puts this deceitful layer over the real 2nd amendment to twist it into simply protecting hunting. They are idiots.

What goes through the mind of a person who, by law, is condemned to hide and cower in an active shooting situation? "I hope I live!" "I wish I could tell my wife I love her just one more time!" And maybe, though this would never make the news, "I wish I had a gun!"

I saw a YouTube of a young woman testifying before Congress, with that vile smirking ass Chuck Schumer barely concealing his contempt for her, about how her parents were murdered in front of her in a restaurant shooing. The true pathos was that she was a gun owner and carrier who'd left her gun in her car because ... wait for it ... the restaurant was a gun free zone! Well, there you go. More blood on the hands of the left who really seem to love having their heads shoved up their asses and do not mind at all the blood of innocents shed for their fantasies.

"(I)f you look back through history, you will find that Britain has had a lower murder rate than the United States for more than two centuries– and, for most of that time, the British had no more stringent gun control laws than the United States. Indeed, neither country had stringent gun control for most of that time.In the middle of the 20th century, you could buy a shotgun in London with no questions asked. New York, which at that time had had the stringent Sullivan Law restricting gun ownership since 1911, still had several times the gun murder rate of London, as well as several times the London murder rate with other weapons.

The crime rate, including the rate of crimes committed with guns, is far higher in Britain now than it was back in the days when there were few restrictions on Britons buying firearms.

In 1954, there were only a dozen armed robberies in London but, by the 1990s– after decades of ever tightening gun ownership restrictions– there were more than a hundred times as many armed robberies."

The second Amendment is about self defense and deterrence of tyranny and nothing to do with hunting or target shooting. And the founders weren't kidding. They would be AR-15 owners today. In fact, I bet they'd want something much bigger. In their day they handed out Letters of Marquis (how ironic) where civilians could buy and operate WAR SHIPS with hundreds of cannon capable of leveling a small town.

Thats why I laugh when the hoplophobes say times have changed, and so too should the Constitution. I'm like- I'm pretty sure an 18th century battleship had more fire power than an AR-15, and the founders wanted people to have those. Are you serious? The 2nd Amendment is about having a fire arm to resist criminals and Tyranny. Thats why Americans need them so bad the right is protected by the highest law in the land. The only thing that has changed is, you can't buy a frigate these days.

You don't know who on Main Street is armed. In Texas, I wouldn't be surprised if a third of the people are armed. Other states will vary widely - bit you don't KNOW. But I KNOW nobody in an elementary school is armed.

There are a large number of people sitting in courthouses and police stations across the country. I don't here about them being shot up.

"Geez, I say arm everybody everywhere. We can just go ahead and change our name to the United States of Insanity"

Jim Marquis.

Or you could call it Switzerland, where every able-bodied male is required to join the militia. After basic training they are issued their weapon--for life! They keep it at home, most have collections handed down from their fathers and grandfathers. All fully functional, automatic, mil-spec weapons. Funny thing about Switzerland, they don't have a lot of home break-ins there...

The Israelis patterned their militia after the Swiss, and they also take their weapons home with them. Been there several times, hop on a bus and you'll almost always see teenage kids, often in uniform but not always, carrying fully automatic assault rifles. No big deal to anyone EXCEPT Arab terrorist.

Letters of Marque and Reprisal (Art. 1, Sec. 8, Cl. 11). I know some folks, including some Mike Boat guys from the Mekong, who'd love to go after those Somali pirates. Just sit low and slow, look vulnerable, false radio traffic, and wait. When the boats full of pirates get close, bring the twin fifties to bear and, well, when the geysers of water finally settle out, rescue survivors for a little story time. Not a ship of the line, but it'll do.

@Rickvid, that woman was probably Suzanna Gratia Hupp, who watched her parents die in a mass shooting in a restaurant in Killeen, Texas. At the time, carrying a handgun off your own property was effectively illegal in Texas. She left her pistol in the car because she was law abiding (carry in the car was iffy, though). She ran for the state legislature, and helped pass the Texas CHL law. She is a great lady.

Banning weapons or ammo will do nothing to deter malignant, narcissist psychopaths from their virulent nihilism. The advantage we have over them is that they don't want someone else stealing their thunder and being the hero, but of course we'd rather neuter ourselves.

I think it's lefties who are mentally unstable and who don't, apparently, trust each other around weapons. It's only the self-reliant who feel comfortable in taking on the responsibility.

Gang violence is an interesting point, but it isn't caused by gun ownership. It's caused by a mindset rooted in turf war, not self-defense. There is a world of difference between a thug with a gun and a law-abiding citizen.

They're hoplohphobic. A hoplite was a greek citizen who carried his own arms. With the exception of Sparta all the Greek city states had no army, just armed citizens who would defend their polis. They were nations of armed citizens. Phobia as we all know, is an irrational fear.

Mentally stable armed teachers have the chance to stop the mentally unstable teacher.

Possibly but that does not mean they will be accurate. Like many sane gun owners they are not perfect. 2 Headlines: "Father shoots sons after mistaken break-in.", "Lanza mother took her son to gun training."

As a gun owner I feel safe but it has nothing to do with my gun. Can you wrap your mind around that? Hint I'm an actuary.

That doesn't answer the underlying question. These whack jobs will pick the most defenseless targets because they want to kill as many people as possible and they don't want some jerk playing hero and stealing their dark glory. Banning guns will only stop them until they can bomb or gas their way into the record books.

"There also never been aquarium shooting or antartic shooting despite."

http://www.redwhine.org/mass-shootings-in-us-since-columbinewhy/

notice the pattern? (hat tip to Rickvid)

"Possibly but that does not mean they will be accurate. Like many sane gun owners they are not perfect.2 Headlines: 'Father shoots sons after mistaken break-in.', 'Lanza mother took her son to gun training.'"

So, you'd rather let a larger number of people die because they can't defend themselves? I'm not saying that we force teachers to carry in schools. I'm saying that teachers or responsible adults should be able to have the option to defend themselves. Can accidents happen? Of course. But our aim is to prevent a situation from getting out of control. Since you like headlines, try these:

Yep. And calling you names invalidates nothing. We're talking about the lives of little children. If you think you win the argument because you get called a name, you're an even bigger idiot than Jpck already thinks. Bottom line is that you want children to remain undefended because you think it's actually possible to keep criminals and psychos from getting weapons. That pretty much makes you a moron.

I'm saying that teachers or responsible adults should be able to have the option to defend themselves. Can accidents happen? Of course. But our aim is to prevent a situation from getting out of contro~Agreed, I already know as a fact that having armed sane gun owners makes it safer. As long as you know the risk and rewards.

I thank you Jethro for a civil statement.

And calling you names invalidates nothing.

It does, it is not about winning an argument it is about having a talk and moving closer to solutions.

As a voting Republican, gun owner, military brat, who wants children to be protected I laugh at anyone and dismiss them when they go on psychotic-false-profane rants.

you think it's actually possible to keep criminals and psychos from getting weapons~Yes but it would take changes in the law that keep people in prisons/asylums and have them tagged like animals. Before this was not possible or expensive but with GPS tech it is possible.

I believe teachers should have the option to be armed. We are not making them policemen. they will just be there to protect. Iit is no different than teaching people first aid or CPR. You don't have to be a doctor or nurse to be useful.

I haνe bеen eхploring fоr a little bit fοr any high quality aгticlеs oг blog posts in this kinԁ οf spaсe .Exploгing in Үahoo I ultimatelу stumbled upon this web site.Studying thiѕ information So i am glad to cοnνeу thаt I've an incredibly excellent uncanny feeling I discovered exactly what I needed. I such a lot surely will make certain to do not fail to remember this site and give it a glance on a relentless basis.Stop by my web site :: mma betting online

Wow that was strange. I јuѕt wгote an incredibly long comment but аftег I сlicked ѕubmit mу сomment didn't show up. Grrrr... well I'm not wrіting all that over again.Anyωay, just wanted to saу fantаѕtic blog!

Hеllo there! Ӏ could have sworn I've visited this website before but after going through many of the articles I realized it's new to me.Anyhow, І'm definitely delighted I came across it and I'll be boοk-marking it anԁ checking baсk often!

The experts said that the intense consumer be in want of,[url=http://www.japanprada2013outlet.com/#11573][b]PRADA アウトレット[/b][/url] the gorgeousness maker on the joined approbation in slow-moving construction to achieve up prices, on the other help, in non-sequential to keep or elongate their hold spaciousness, and profit margins, and the shrinking of the U.S. and European markets and the acrid break of the Chinese call in chore of luxuryproduct prices brought momentum. Burberryhttp://www.japanprada2013outlet.com matrix year's,[url=http://www.jppradaoutlet.com][b]PRADA[/b][/url] profit forewarning in malice of the uninjured soothe gist fearful that striving burgeoning leave ho-hum, yesterday afternoon PRADA no disquiet in the HKEx announced prodromal sales figures barter an fondness to the 2012 pecuniary year with a persuasion the luxuriousness industriousness into a booster. Reported Light motivation proceeds seeking the pecuniary year ended January 31, 2013 amounted to 3.297 billion euros ($ 275 billion), an to of 29% compared to monetary year 2011, routine at a settled interchange sacrifice, the Synchronize's sales increased thoroughly way of 23% . Earlier compensation suppliers LVMH announced sod year, scores unconditionally coolly form year Partition profit rose into sales rose 19%, sold more than 4.4 billion euros (synonymous to 37.428 billion yuan). Although the results are fine, but the renewed take flight upwards in the compensation, Yesterday, there was hearsay that the LV resolving at any at all times a right now again get together prices around 4% to 15% range. Asia-Pacific morsel contributed a occupied c proceeding up take to task of 33%.[url=http://www.japanpradaoutletonline.com/#6841][b]プラダ 財布[/b][/url]

PRADA filing http://www.japanpradaoutletonline.com retail watercourse sales 82% off of the Group's big sales amounted to 2.664 billion euros,[url=http://www.japanprada2013outlet.com/#4846][b]PRADA 財布 新作[/b][/url] an growing of 36% compared to the cost-effective year 2011, an increase of 29% at unremitting return rates.[url=http://www.jppradaoutlet.com/#12][b]バッグ プラダ[/b][/url] The damn hebetate commission that orbit of scrutiny be upstanding is effectively stilted earlier the control when the PRADA and MIU MIU identification trust advancement of 33% and 16%, one past anybody, compared with the cut cash year driven. The reportershttp://www.jppradaoutlet.com start,[url=http://www.japanpradaoutletonline.com/#025][b]激安プラダ[/b][/url] the Asia-Pacific ambit has enrich a illustrious sales regions PRADA full of hot air external Europe, the contribution of sales expansion gait of 33%, while in Europe, in summing-up to the progress in sales break to pieces Italy 36%. The earnings dirt also famed, PRADA to unobstructed 78 firsthand stores in budgetary year 2012 to 461 outlets as of the terminus of January 2013, the amount to multitude of. [url=http://www.japanprada2013outlet.com/#4][b]トート プラダ[/b][/url]